The Instigator
reader5567
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Kbbond
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Is Creationism true?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/17/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 406 times Debate No: 65292
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

reader5567

Pro

I believe that Creationism is true because the world would not make sense without a God of some sort. The chance of evolution actually happening is about as likely as a blindfolded person throwing a pebble into outer space and knocking down a satellite that then crashes onto a target on the back of a truck speeding down the highway. Even with billions of years, that"s not going to happen. As you can see, by these numbers alone, Evolution is already highly improbable.

(1) https://answersingenesis.org...

(2)http://www.mathematicsofevolution.com...
Kbbond

Con

While the chances of evolution occurring as you described are quite staggering, I would say that someone has become very good at throwing a pebble into space, hitting a satellite, and then hitting a target in the back of a moving truck since evolution can be seen and measured! Further, your mention of probability asserts that while an event may be unlikely, there is still a probability of occurrence (basic statistics). Considering there are an estimated 40 billion earth-sized planets in the habitable zone in the Milky Way Galaxy alone (in a sea of an estimated 100 billion galaxies at the low end) I'd say your chances of winning the lottery are worse, people do win however. My assertation is that you are assuming evolution is the reason for the origin which all scientists will say is false, evolution does not seek to describe the origins. Evolution tracks descent with modification and its technical definition is a change in allele frequency over time, neither have anything to do with the origin.

I assume that with your theory of Creationism, you will also argue that the universe is only 6,000 years old. Using simple math to look at ice cores, that can be dismissed immediately which is basically the foundation of Creationism's argument. At a depth of 1855m, there is approximately 11 annual rings within a span of 19cm (0.19m). That means that within 1 meter, at a depth of 1855m, there is 58 years worth of annual layers from winter/summer oscillations. This would be considered an average depth as the deepest known point of the Antarctic ice sheet is ~4800m. So given that being the average as there is higher compaction deeper (more years compacted into a smaller space) and less compaction shallower (less years packed into a segment), we can extrapolate to show that within ice layers alone (using rudimentary math) that the earth from the time of cooling to allow snow events, is at least 277,008 years old (58 years/m times 4776m of depth = 277,008).

(1) http://www.antarcticglaciers.org...
Debate Round No. 1
reader5567

Pro

First, thank you for debating with me. I look forward to your arguments.

I hope that you do not mind if I put out a series of arguments.

1- Meteoritic dust falls on the earth continuously, adding up to thousands, if not millions, of tons of dust per year. Realizing this, and knowing that the moon also had meteoritic dust piling up for what they thought was millions of years, N.A.S.A. scientists were worried that the first lunar ship that landed would sink into the many feet of dust which should have accumulated. However, only about one-eighth of an inch of dust was found, indicating a young moon.

2- Evolutionists insist that dinosaurs died out millions of years before man appeared. However, there are many reasons to disbelieve this. There are the stories of animals much like dinosaurs in the legends of many lands. These creatures were called dragons. Many times in the recent past, explorers have recorded sightings of flying reptiles much like the pterodactyl. Human footprints were found along with those of a dinosaur in limestone near the Paluxy River in Texas. Also not to be tossed aside is the possibility of dinosaurs living today. Consider the stories such as the Loch Ness monster (of which many convincing photographs have been taken). Some have claimed to see dinosaur-like creatures in isolated areas of the world. Recently, a Japanese fishing boat pulled up a carcass of a huge animal that intensely resembled a dinosaur. A group of scientists on an expedition into a jungle looking for dinosaur evidence claims that they witnessed one, but their camera was damaged.

3- The sun's diameter is shrinking at the rate of five feet per hour. At this rate, life could not have existed on the earth 100,000 years ago.

4- The spin rate of the earth is slowing .00002 second per year. If the earth were the billions of years old that the evolutionists say it is, the centrifugal force would have notably deformed the earth.

5- The earth's magnetic field is decaying rapidly, at a constant (if not decreasing) rate. At this rate, 8000 years ago the earth's magnetism would have equaled that of a magnetic star, a highly unlikely occurrence. Also, if electric currents in the earth's core are responsible for the earth's magnetism, the heat generated by these currents 20,000 years ago would have dissolved the earth.

Source-

(1) http://www.jesus-is-savior.com...
Kbbond

Con

Kbbond forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
reader5567

Pro

reader5567 forfeited this round.
Kbbond

Con

Kbbond forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by dhardage 2 years ago
dhardage
Pro needs to understand that Answers in Genesis is not a reliable source of information.
No votes have been placed for this debate.